This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as thev have evolved, olease refer to the EIS documents directlv.

Appttfitfx MO24

Appendix G: Interim Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs)

Alternative 2 & 3

In the development of PACFISH, landscape-scale interim RMOs describing good habitat for

anadromous fish were developed, using stream inventory data for pool frequency, large woody

debris, bank stability and lower bank angle, and width to depth ratio. Applicable published and

non-published scientific literature was used to define favorable water temperatures. All of the

described features may not occur in a specific segment of stream within a watershed, but all generally should occur at the watershed scale for stream systems of moderate to large size (3rd to

6th order).This material was reviewed in regard to its applicability to inland native fish. It has been

determined that the RMOs described in PACFISH were good indicators of ecosystem health. The

analysis that led to development of the RMOs involved watersheds in Oregon, Washington, and

Idaho that include inland native fish as well as anadromous fish. With the exception of the temperature objective, which has been modified, the RMOs represented a good starting point to

describe the desired condition for fish habitat.

Interim RMOs are considered to be the best watershed scale information available; National

Forest managers would be encouraged to establish site-specific RMOs through watershed analysis or site specific analysis. RMOs should be refined to better reflect conditions that are attainable

in a specific watershed or stream reach based on local geology, topography, climate, and potential

vegetation. Establishment of RMOs would require completion of watershed analysis to provide the

ecological basis for the change. However, interim RMOs may be modified by amendment in the

absence of watershed analysis where watershed or stream reach specific data support the

change. In all cases, the rationale supporting these changes, and the effects of the changes will

be documented.

The interim RMOs for stream channel conditions provide the criteria against which attainment or

progress toward attainment of the riparian goals is measured as described in the DRFC. Interim

RMOs provide the target toward which agency managers aim as they conduct resource management activities across the landscape. It is not expected that the objectives would be met instantaneously, but rather would be achieved over time. However, the intent of interim RMOs are not to

establish a ceiling for what constitutes good habitat conditions. Actions that reduce habitat quality,

whether existing conditions are better or worse than objective values, are inconsistent with the

purpose of this interim direction. Without the benchmark provided by measurable RMOs habitat

suffers a continual erosion. As indicated below, some of the objectives would apply to forested

ecosystems, some to non-forested ecosystems, and some to all ecosystems regardless of

whether or not they are forested. Objectives for six environmental features have been identified,

including one key feature and five supporting features. These features are good indicators of

ecosystem health, are quantifiable, and are subject to accurate, repeatable measurements.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

AjUH&ndix J-1O25

Habitat Feature Interim Objectives

Pool Frequency (kf1) Varies by channel width

(all systems) Wetted width I 10 I 20 I 25 I 50 I 75 I 100 I 125 I 150 I 200

(feet)

Pools per mile | 96 | 56 | 47 [ 26 | 23 | 18 | 14 | 12 | 9

Water Temperature (sf2) No measurable increase in maximum water temperature (7 day moving average

of daily maximum temperature measured as the average of the miximum daily

temperature of the warmest consecutive 7 day period). Maximum water temperatures below 59F within adult bulltrout holding habitat and below 48F within

bulltrout spawning and rearing habitats.

Maximum water temperatures below 64F within Anadromous fish migration and

rearing habitats and below 60F withing Anadromous spawning habitats.

Large Woody Debris (sf) Coastal California, Oregon, and Washington:

(forested systems) > 80 pieces per mile; >24 inch diameter; >50 foot length.

East of cascade Crest in Oregon, Washington, Idaho:

> 20 pieces per mile; > 12 inch diameter; > 35 foot length.

Bank Stability (sf) > 80 percent stable,

(non-forested systems)

Lower Bank Angle (sf) > 75 percent of banks with <90 degree angle (i.e., undercut),

(non-forested systems)

Width/Depth Ratio (sf) < 10, mean wetted width divided by mean depth

(all systems)

'Key features

Supporting feature

Alternative 4 and 6

Intent of RMOs

Interim RMOs for stream channel conditions provide the criteria against which attainment or

progress toward attainment of the riparian goals is measured. Interim RMOs provide the target

toward which agency managers aim as they conduct resource management activities across the

landscape in the absence of Ecosystem Analysis. It is not expected that the objectives would be

met instantaneously, but rather would be achieved over time. These variables provide a synoptic

description and characterization of watershed, riparian, and stream channel processes and existing conditions that can be used to guide management activity design, implementation, and monitoring. RMOs are used as a tool, in combination with watershed management objectives, to help

assess attainment of watershed, riparian, and aquatic goals and objectives.

Interim RMOs (Table 1) describe watershed-scale habitat conditions for specific geoclimatic areas

within the interior Columbia River Basin. The attributes are divided into three basic categories:

Instream variables, water temperature, and riparian vegetation. The following statements provide

the intent for use of the interim RMOs and their purpose in a comprehensive conservation program.

1. RMOs are a tool to help evaluate progress towards attainment of watershed, aquatic and riparian goals described within the DRFC.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appttttrfix M026

2. RMOs should be developed/analyzed for application at finer scales through evaluation of reference conditions in similar landforms, valley settings, and stream types. The interim values in

Tables 1, 2, and 3 provide a starting point if local analysis is not completed but it is recommended that Field Units conduct their own analysis due to the variable conditions in the interior

Columbia River Basin. Field units should consider using similar techniques described by

Overton et al. (1995) to define appropriate RMOs.

3. Analysis of stream inventory and riparian data together with Ecosystem Analysis is useful to

identify watershed processes and stream reaches that may not be functioning properly.

4. Streams and riparian conditions which currently exceed interim RMOs should be managed

consistent with the state water quality anti-degradation policy.

5. Interim RMOs are not to be viewed as independent from other components of the comprehensive Aquatic Conservation Strategy, rather are part of an aquatic conservation progam. Interim

RMOs are not sensitive to immediate effects, rather exhibit response to cumulative effects and

factors influencing channel history over time.

6. Interim RMOs do not replace State and Federal water quality standards promulgated under

federal Clean Water Act or state laws, but should complement these standards in providing

measurable habitat attributes.

Procedure for Interim RMO Application

Stream inventory data is primarily viewed as an information source useful in developing an understanding of watershed/stream systems, which then serves as a foundation to make policy and

management decisions. This information can then be used to establish management objectives to

conserve or restore watershed and aquatic functions. Interim RMOs apply to all perennial streams

that support aquatic life for a portion of the year, for example spawning streams that have discontinuous low flow late in the year would still be subject to these attributes. Individual parameters

should not be used to evaluate aquatic and riparian condition, rather they should be used in combination to provide a synopsis of condition. Placing emphasis on individual variable interpretations

may lead to erroneous conclusions related to watershed, riparian, and aquatic condition.

Interim RMO application or development can follow these steps:

1. Field Units should establish values or ranges of important riparian and in-stream variables

expected for natural conditions, stratified by stream types and biophysical environments.

2. The values listed in Tables 1 and 2 are a starting point but local analysis is preferred due to the

variable nature of streams within the interior Columbia River Basin.

3. If current conditions are largely different than locally established values or interim values, further analysis should be conducted to determine the reasons for these differences in terms of

watershed, riparian, and channel processes. Watershed-scale interim RMOs may be outside

the range of natural conditions for a specific area. A fine-scale evaluation of reference condition

should be used to identify causal mechanisms. Stream conditions can vary from disturbances

and channel evolution histories that influenced channel form and conditions.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

AfifHHidix 1-1027

4. Using information from step 3, establish management objectives that relate to conserving or

restoring watershed, riparian, and channel processes.

5. Recommend management activities to meet the intent of objectives in step 4 to achieve

desired outcomes based on the understanding of watershed, riparian, and channel processes.

6. Conduct implementation and effectiveness monitoring to determine if management activities

have the intended results and "feedback" information for future management objectives and

actions.

Instream Variables.

The values in Table 2 are points of reference from which current conditions can be evaluated if

local analysis of reference stream inventory information is not performed. These values were

developed from analysis of stream inventory measurements collected from over 2000 streams

(6382 reaches) within the project area and synthesized as part of the ICBEMP Assessment

(Star—Chapter 3). The ranges in Table 2 display the 50th to 75th percentiles of stream inventory

data from watersheds in natural to near natural condition (Management Area Categories 1 and 2;

Wilderness and Research Natural Areas). Data is not continuous over the entire assessment area

which is reflected by low sample sizes or areas of no data (ERU 10, 11, and 1.2). Consider using

CRB wide RMO values when sample size is low or data is not displayed for a strata. Caution

should be used when making interpretations from CRB values or strata with low sample size. It

also should be noted that most stream inventory data was collected from forested stream systems

and may not be applicable to rangeland stream systems. It is important to consider that if the

interim values are not appropriate for the local area, a similar analysis process can be used with

local data to determine the appropriate numbers for the scale of concern (e.g. 4th or 6th field

HUCs or stream reach).

To calculate large pools, pools, large wood, and single wood per mile from Table 2 use the following conversion:

number per mile=(table frequency value)x5280/average riffle width in feet
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appttttdlx M028

Table 1. Summary of Interim RMOs

Category Interim Criteria

I. Instream Variables Stratified by ERU and stream slope class in Table 2.

Large Pools per Mile

Pools per Mile

Pool Width/Depth

Large Wood per Mile (forested systems)

Single Wood per Mile (forested systems)

Bank Stability >80 percent bank stability in ERUs 1-12

(non-forested systems) >90 percent bank stability in ERU 13 (Overton et at. 1995)

Fine sediment Surface fine sediment levels should be developed by local

Field Units for their area. In ERU 13, mean surface fines

(<6.0 mm) as measured in pool tails and low gradient riffles are

described as follows (Overton et al. 1995):

Channel Type Plutonic Volcanic Metamorphic

Geologic Type Geologic Type Geologic Type

A26251 4

B 23 " 27 16

C 37 17 no data

II. Temperature No measurable increase in maximum water temperature (7-day

moving average of daily maximum temperature measured as

the average of the maximum daily temperature of the warmest

consecutive 7-day period) as required by state water quality

standards.

III. Riparian Vegetation Forest and range riparian areas: Mature forest and late ecological

status range riparian conditions adapted to non-lethal, lethal, or

mixed fire regimes and other disturbances characteristic of the

site. This should be measured by the percent similarity of riparian vegetation to the mature forest and late ecological status

range community/composition. The percent similarity should be

greater than 60 percent (USDA 1992).
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Ajipettdix M*>2&

Table 2. Range of instream values for the ICBEMP area displayed by the 50th and 75th percentile

for natural and near natural stream data distribution. All values except pool width/mean maximum

depth are normalized by stream width. Ranges in the heading represent interior Columbia River

Basin conditions and are not stratified by ERU or slope class. Numbers within parentheses are

sample sizes. Blank cells indicate no data. A brief description of each variable follows this table.

__., I Slope I Large Pools I Pools I PM°'T^ I LargeW°°d I Single Wood tMU

 Class Per Mile Per Mile Mean wax Per Mile Per Mile

Depth

50 75 50 75 50 75 50 75 50 75

0.009-0.036 0.040-0.077 5.6-4.2 0.048-0.158 0.179-0.354

(870) (870) (831) (450) (259)

1 All 0.020 I 0.049 0.048 I 0.082 5.4 I 4.3 0.092 I 0.209 NA I NA

(143) (143) (140) (135)

<2% 0.032 0.050 0.039 0.050 7.0 6.3 0.146 0.429 NA NA

(8) (8) (8) (8)

2-4% 0.039 0.062 0.066 0.096 6.7 5.3 0.158 0.550 NA NA

(35) (35) (36) (33)

>4% 0.018 0.042 0.039 0.076 4.8 4.1 0.058 0.176 NA NA

(95) (95) (92) (89)

2 All 0.006 0.025 0.044 0.069 6.2 5.2 0.049 0.148 NA NA

(43) (43) (40) (40)

<2% 0.004 0.032 0.045 0.103 6.2 5.2 0.049 0.148 NA NA

(17) (17) (15) (15)

2-4% 0.014 0.061 0.061 0.168 7.5 5.9 0.134 0.427 NA NA

(6) (6) (6) (6)

>4% 0.006 0.018 0.031 0.060 5.5 4.9 0.049 0.145 NA NA

(19) 09) (18) (18)

3 All 0.001 0.009 0.009 0.023 5.1 4.2 0.046 0.084 NA NA

(14) (14) (13) (13)

<2% 8.2 0.091 NA NA

(2) (2) (1) (1)

2-4% 0.014 0.015 0.024 0.026 6.2 4.6 0.073 0.085 NA NA

(5) (5) (5) (5)

>4% 0.000 0.002 0.008 0.014 4.4 4.0 0.037 0.075 NA NA

I I (7) I | (7) | (7) | | (7) | | |
Table 2 Continued.

_RU I Slope I Large Pools I Poo^s I 'SS^Sf I LargeWood I Single Wood

tHU

 Class Per Mile Per Mile Mean Max perMile Per Mile

ueptn

50 75 50 75 50 75 50 75 50 75

0.009-0.036 0.040-0.077 5.6-4.2 0.048-0.158 0.179-0.354

(870) (870) (831) (450) (259)

4 All 0.000 I 0.003 0.027 I 0.049 2.4 I 2.10.01 9 I 0.062 NA I NA

(59) (59) (45) (44)

<2% 0.000 0.005 0.027 0.053 2.4 2.1 0.006 0.025 NA NA

(17) (17) (14) (12)

2-4% 0.001 0.004 0.029 0.044 2.4 2.2 0.020 0.085 NA NA

(22) (22) (17) (17)

>4% 0.000 0.000 0.030 0.051 2.4 1.9 0.020 0.067 NA NA

(19) (19) (13) (14)

5 All 0.017 0.048 0.053 0.084 4.4 4.2 0.025 NA NA

(6) (6) (6) (4)

<2% 0.035 0.123 7.6 NA NA

(1) (1] (1)

2-4% 0.043 0.063 7.6 0.032 NA NA

(2) (2) (2) (2)

>4% 0.000 0.000 0.032 4.4 0.018 NA NA

(3) (3) (3) (2)

6 All 0.003 0.016 0.027 0.052 4.4 3.4 0.040 0.117 NA NA

(174) (174) (171) (162)

I <2% 0.021 0.042 0.026 0.048 4.4 3.8 0.008 0.068 NA NA

I (18) (18) (17) (14)

2-4% 0.015 0.048 0.027 0.061 6.0 3.5 0.086 0.133 NA NA

(27) (27) (27) (24)

>4% 0.001 0.009 0.027 0.049 4.2 3.2 0.038 0.156 NA NA

(126) (126) (124) (121)

7 All 0.009 0.018 0.014 0.028 5.4 4.3 0.009 0.040 NA NA

(27) (27) (25) (26)

<2% 0.017 0.033 0.017 0.034 5.7 5.2 0.009 0.013 NA NA

(6) (6) (6) (6)

2-4% 0.013 0.023 0.018 0.032 5.7 4.9 0.009 0.044 NA NA

(?) (9) (9) (9)

>4% 0.000 0.001 0.011 0.030 4.3 3.7 0.006 0.151 NA NA

I I (11) I I (11) I I (10) I I (10) I I I

This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appeatfx M03£
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appendix 1-1031

Table 2 Continued.

I TTi \~, »i I r, ,I Pool Width/ I Large Wood I _. 7^.T~

__,. Slope Large Pools Pools .. ..

 M Single Wood

tHU

 Class Per Mile Per Mile Mean Max per Mile Per Mile

Depth

50 75 50 75 50 75 50 75 50 75

0.009-0.036 0.040-0.077 5.6-4.2 0.048-0.158 0.179-0.354

(870) (870) (831) (450) (259)

8 All 0.008 I 0.027 0.033 I 0.051 5.2 I 4.2 0.344 I 0.652 0.401 I 0.498

(72) (45) (45) (26) (10)

<2% 0.016 0.034 0.032 0.094 5.3 4.8 0.149 0.271 0.446

(10 CM) CMJ CO (5)

2-4% 0.007 0.028 0.032 0.043 5.4 3.7 0.244 0.616 0.460

(16) (16) (16) 00) (4)

>4% 0.007 0.032 0.035 0.060 4.7 4.1 0.567 0.718 0.834

(18) (18) (18) (15) (1)

9 All 0.162 6.2 NA NA 2.274

CO CO CO (1)

<2% (0) (0) (0) NA NA (0)

2-4% 0.162 6.2 NA NA 2.274

CO CO CO I CO

>4% (0) (0) (0) NA NA (0)

13 All 0.018 0.050 0.058 0.103 6.5 5.1 NA NA 0.170 0.335

(358) (358) (345) (248)

<2% 0.034 0.062 0.065 0.111 7.5 5.6 NA NA 0.179 0.375

(109) (109) (111) (81)

2-4% 0.021 0.050 0.070 0.116 6.9 5.6 NA NA 0.169 0.306

(149) (149) (146) (116)

>4% 0.002 0.027 0.034 0.070 5.4 4.5 NA NA 0.150 0.348

| | (100) | | (100) | | (88) | I I | (51) |

Large Pool Frequency: The number of pool channel units with a maximum depth greater than

0.8 m (2.6 feet) and surface area greater than 20 m2 (215 ft2) per the reach mean riffle width. This

is calculated by: (number of large pools)x[(average riffle width)/(reach length)]. Because of the

problems with pool frequency measurements for high gradient streams values were not assigned

for the slope class >4%.

Pool Frequency: The number of pool channel units per reach mean riffle width. This is calculated

by: (number of pools)x[(average riffle width)/(reach length)]. Because of the problems with pool

frequency measurements for high gradient streams values were not assigned for the -slope class

>4%.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

ApiittmHx X-1032

Large Wood Frequency: The number of pieces of wood per reach mean riffle width, surveyed

with the USFS Region 6 stream inventory protocol. Tallied wood includes all pieces with diameters

greater than 20 inches and lengths greater than 35 ft (the "large" category of the Region 6 protocol). This is calculated by: (number of pieces of large wood in the reach)x[(average riffle width)/

(reach length)]. This value should only be used as a reference condition in forested landscapes in

eastern Washington and eastern Oregon.

Single Wood Frequency: The number of single pieces of wood per reach mean riffle width, surveyed with the USFS Region1/4 stream inventory protocol. Tallied wood includes pieces with

diameters greater than 10 cm (4 inches) and lengths that exceed 3.0 m (9.8 ft) or two thirds the

channel width. This is calculated by: (number of pieces of wood in the reach)x[(average riffle

width)/(reach length)]. This value should only be used as a reference condition in forested landscapes in Idaho and western Montana.

Alternative 5

Timber emphasis areas within Forested environments

RMOs are locally developed based on key channel and habitat characteristics in the watershed of

concern. These measures are then compared with those from streams of highly similar channel

and watershed geomorphic character, which are judged to fully support the waters' beneficial

uses, in order to produce "reference conditions. Determination of "fully support" must include documentation of assumptions on which judgements are based, allowing for revision over time as

new information becomes available. Benchmarks based on the reference conditions can then be

established for instream characteristics and remeasured over time to evaluate change. This system allows for the effectiveness of management practices to be monitored in relation to the

benchmarks in order to provide a meaningful basis for adaptive management.

A benchmark-based system for developing RMOs can be summarized as follows:

a. Existing riparian conditions are measured and compared with reference conditions, where possible, to establish benchmarks.

b. Prescriptions (site-specific standards and guides) are developed to ensure high levels of function even when the relationship of existing conditions to natural or reference conditions remains

uncertain.

c. Monitoring is conducted in an adaptive management framework in order to answer four key

questions: 1) was the situation diagnosis correct? 2) was the prescription correct? 3) was the prescription implemented? 4) was the prescription effective?

RMOs are not defined on the basis of instream standards because meaningful instream standards cannot be developed from existing databases at this time, except in some localized situations. Instream characteristics are a product of complex vegetation, channel, and landscape geohydrologic and stochastic processes and interactions. The instream products of these processes

and interactions are, by their very nature, difficult to predict for any given place and point in time.

However, if riparian zone timber and other attributes are managed on a functional basis, stream

inputs will be maintained to produce desired instream attributes and functions.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Ap$Mrf»dix I-103B

In summary, RMOs relevant to each stream input process of concern are integrated into the

analysis and subsequent management decision-making system.

Livestock emphasis areas within rangeland environments

RMOs are to be based on the definition of "Proper Functioning Condition" as follows:

Riparian-wetland areas are functioning properly when adequate vegetation, landform, or large

woody debris is present to:

a) dissipate stream energy associated with high water flows, thereby reducing erosion and

improving water quality;

b) filter sediment, capture bedload, and aid floodplain development;

c) improve flood-water retention and ground-water recharge;

d) develop root masses that stabilize stream banks against cutting action;

e) develop diverse ponding and channel characteristics to provide the habitat and the water depth,

duration, and temperature necessary for fish production, waterfowl breeding, and other uses;

f) and support greater biodiversity.

Other Emphasis Areas

Interim RMOs as described for Alternative 4 and 6 will apply to other emphasis areas.

Alternative 7

RMOs provide measurable criteria against which attainment, or progress toward attainment, of the

aquatic and riparian goals are measured as described in the DRFC. These RMOs do not address

all the complex elements of the aquatic and riparian goals. RMOs provide a measure of whether

land management practices are providing watershed and habitat characteristics which will support

aquatic species. If conditions at the watershed scale or site-specific scale are below these criteria

then it must be determined why the watershed is not meeting objectives. Where land management activities are the causal agent for not meeting the riparian management objectives then a

plan to remedy the problem needs to be developed.

These Riparian Management Objectives were developed based on those from PACFISH, the

NMFS PACFISH Biological Opinion (BiOp) and the NMFS LRMP BiOp. These in turn were based

on the biological habitat requirements of fish and aquatic resources (Rhodes et al. 1994) or based

on conditions in undeveloped watersheds as a benchmark (Peterson et al. 1993). For salmonids,

RMOs should address habitat components for life history stages affected by land management

activities. Habitat requirements for salmonids have been summarized in Bjornn and Reiser, 1991

and Murphy, 1995.

The method of adjusting the RMOs to particular watersheds is through Watershed Analysis; if

interagency peer reviewed watershed analysis shows that habitat recovery is enhanced and not

retarded by adjustment, or is that these RMOs are not attainable within the watershed, then these

RMOs should be adjusted according to the findings of the watershed analysis. Below are RMOs

for sediment delivery, fine sediment, cobble embeddedness, pools, large woody debris, streambank stability, width/depth ratio, and temperature based on those proposed for PACFISH (USDA

and USDI 1994) and Rhodes et al. (1994):
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

4tpttAt&40S4

1. Sediment Delivery Standard: Reduce delivery of sediment to streams to no more than

20% over natural from all anthropogenic sources in watersheds containing current or historic

spawning or rearing habitat, unless it can be shown through watershed analysis based on

peer reviewed science that stream habitat conditions can improve and substrate and pool

standards can be met with a different sediment standard.

2. Fine Sediment Standard: Limit stream surface fine sediment (<6.4 mm in diameter) averages to <20% in spawning habitat.

3. Cobble Embeddedness Standard: Limit stream cobble embeddedness to <30% in rearing habitat.

4. Bank Stability Standard: Ninety percent of all stream banks should be in a stable

condition.

5. Water Temperature Standard: Reduce or maintain summertime stream temperatures;

reduce temperatures if over 60° F in salmon spawning or rearing habitat. In areas where

salmon do not occur, the optimal range required by the most sensitive native species should

dictate the desired habitat temperature parameter. For instance, where bull trout rear, temperatures should not exceed 46 degrees. During bull trout spawning season, temperatures

should not exceed 41 degrees, and adult bull trout habitat should not exceed 59 degrees.

Interim Riparian Management Area (RMA) Delineation

Alternative 4 and 6

Intent of RMAs

Riparian management areas (RMAs) are areas where maintenance, protection, and restoration of

aquatic processes and functions are emphasized and goals and objectives for aquatic and riparian habitats are met. Riparian systems are water influence areas that include streams and other

aquatic ecosystems. Conservation needs for aquatic and riparian systems can be summarized in

four principles (Sedell, personal communication).

1) A stream needs nutrient inputs and energy to sustain its biological functions.

2) Riparian dependent plants and animals rely on the forest adjacent to streams.

3) Small streams are more affected by hillslope processes than larger streams.

4) The likelihood of disturbance resulting in in-stream effects increases as adjacent slopes

become steeper.

RMAs can be defined in terms of zones or gradients of influence, with an inner zone, where many

primary processes and functions occur, and an outer zone, where processes and functions occur

but at different, less important (secondary) levels to the stream channel. The outer riparian zone

also functions as a transition and buffer between upslope uses and disturbances and the aquatic

environment.

Ecological functions, processes, and disturbance mechanisms are guides for use and protection

priorities in riparian areas. Boundaries between the riparian area and the upslopes may need

expansion to address each of the larger scale disturbance effects that may negatively or positively

impact the unique habitats or sensitive species in riparian environments. To ignore the existence
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appendix 24038

'Not all variables apply to rangeland systems

of these disturbance effects and attempt to maintain a static reserve system may jeopordize the

unique habitats and also the sustainability of associated landscapes (Everett, 1995). The actual

size of riparian areas depends on the local characteristics that define them; it is important to

understand that the dimensions of entire riparian areas are not always proportional to the size of

aquatic systems.

To apply these concepts in RMA delineation, RMAs are divided into two zones as noted: an inner

zone (zone 1) and an outer zone (zone 2). The zone concept is an initial attempt to integrate the

hierarchical landscape approach with the individual conservation needs of unique riparian habitats. Zoning delineates major influence areas, establishing a basis for different levels of disturbance and vegetation management in each zone. This scheme sets the foundation for cumulative

effects determination that is spatially-sensitive in considering watershed disturbing effects.

The dominant processes, functions, disturbance mechanisms for each zone are displayed as variables in Tables 1 and 2, for perennial and intermittent streams.1

Intent of Zone 1 and Zone 2

Zone 1 is the inner riparian area, the community and energy influence area.. It is most important

for protection and maintenance of instream conditions. It also serves to transition processes, functions, and disturbances from streams to floodplains and adjacent riparian areas. Zone 1 is the

area most sensitive to management activities and extends from streams the distances that

approximate the height of the tallest site potential tree (Sedell, personal commnication).

Zone 2 is the outer riparian area, and provides additional riparian area process and functions (for

example, microclimate) and also is a buffer area capable of absorbing disturbances from the

uplands. It is commonly variable in width and is the interface and transition between the inner

riparian area and the uplands.

Table 1 displays the dominant processes, functions, and disturbance mechanisms for the two

riparian zones in perennial stream environments. Table 2 displays the dominant processes, functions and disturbance mechanisms for the two riparian zones for intermittent stream environments. Neither list is inclusive.

Perennial and intermittent streams variables were separated into two tables because the processes, functions and disturbance mechanisms for these systems are different (principle 3 and 4).

Intermittent streams often have steeper adjacent sideslopes and can be more prone to slope

instability.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appendix X-1O36

Table 1. Perennial Streams. Dominant Processes, Functions, and Disturbance Mechanisms.

Variables Zone 1 Zone 2

Shade for stream temperature P*

Shade for riparian species P S

Large wood delivery to streams S

Large wood delivery to riparian areas P P

Leaf and other organic matter inputs P S

Riparian microclimate P S

Buffer for water quality P P

Nutrient and energy to streams P S

Habitat: aquatic species P

Habitat: riparian dependent species P S

Habitat/migration for terrestrial species P

Root strength P S

Soil moisture & temperature P S

Sediment trapping P S

Flooding * * P S

Fire** S S

Insects and Disease** S S

* P=primary emphasis S=secondary emphasis

"Primary natural disturbance mechanisms

Table 2. Intermittent Streams. Dominant processes, functions, and disturbance mechanisms.

Variable Zonel Zone 2

Shade for riparian species P P

Large wood delivery to streams P P

Large wood delivery to riparian areas P P

Leaf and other organic matter inputs P S

Riparian microclimate P P

Buffer for water quality P P

Nutrient and energy to streams P S

Habitat: aquatic species P

Habitat: riparian dependent species P P

Root strength P S

Soil moisture & temperature P P

Sediment trapping P P

Flooding * P S

Debris flows P P

Fire* S P

Insects and Disease* S P

* P=primary influence S=secondary influence

"Primary natural disturbance mechanisms
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

ApjfcMHlix I4037

RMA Interim Delineation Process

The following process is used for interim delineation of RMA widths, to highlight riparian areas,

until more locally specific information from watershed scale and other appropriate analysis is in

place.

RMA delineation is based primarily on two indicators: site potential tree heights or extent of floodprone width. For forested environments, site potential tree heights are the primary determinant

(concepts taken from FEMAT and PACFISH). For rangeland environments floodprone width by

channel type is the primary determinant. Extent of riparian vegetation, for either forested or rangeland systems, can be used as well, if data is available. The determinant for zone 1 would be the

extent of the hydro and meso riparian potential natural vegetation, and the determinant for zone 2

would be the extent of the xeroriparian potential natural vegetation.

I. Forested Environments

The process for interim delineation for riparian areas divides RMAs into two zones, using the principle of a site potential tree height for both zones as a starting point and adjustment for additional

width, based on adjacent sideslope steepness, to buffer the aquatic environment from disturbances. Floodprone width can also be used. See section II, Rangeland Environments, for procedure.

A. Perennial Streams

Zone 11 site potential tree height, or the extent of the floodprone area; whichever is greater.

Zone 21 site potential tree height plus adjustment for disturbance buffer using Figure 1.

B. Intermittent Streams

Zone 1: 1/2site potential tree height, or extent of the floodplain area, whichever is greater.

Zone 2:1/2 site potential tree height plus adjustment for disturbance buffer using Figure 2.

C. All streams

Overlay zone 1 and zone 2 widths with unstable and landslide prone areas for full delineation

of area requiring emphasis for aquatic and riparian environments.

D. Total RMA for a stream system

The sum of the width determined from steps A through C is the total RMA for the stream network of concern. For example, a perennial sream with a site potential tree height of 150 feet

and 40 percent adjacent sideslope has the following RMA width.

Example:

RMA = 1 SPTH (z1) + 1 SPTH (z2) + 0 feet from figure 1 = 300 feet

Additional area requiring special consideration for protection and management is added from

landslide prone analysis if it overlaps and extends beyond the RMA. Landslide prone determination shall be based on the procedure outlined in Montgomery (?).
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

A^ttttdlx I-1O38

Site Potential Tree Heights Definitions and SlopeTables

The definition of "site potential tree" for purposes of defining a default is:

The average maximum height of the tallest dominant trees (200 years or more) for a given

site class" (FEMAT, pV-34).

Data from the Science Assessment for the three forested potential vegetation groups (PVGs) in

the Interior Columbia Basin shows the following average maximum heights.

PVG Site Class Dominant Species Ave. Max. Height

Dry Forest ? Ponderosa Pine/W. Larch ? — feet

Moist Forest ? Douglas Fir/Grand Fir ? —feet

Cold Forest ? SubAlpine Fir/E. Spruce ? — feet

The height of the dominant trees for any given site is a function of site quality based on elevation,

temperature, soil properties, and other determinants, and therefore is subject to wide variation

across any given landscape. The numbers in the above table are coarse averages estimated

using data from subsample and classifications from an average site class (?). If local data from

site potential curves or other sources is available, they can be used instead of the above PVG

number, as long as the above definition is applied.

Adjustments for needed sediment buffering will be determined using Figure 1 and 2. The adjustment is based on the steepness of side slopes adjacent to the stream channel (principle number

4), using travel distances of surface erosion as the basis for disturbance buffers. It is well established that surface erosion depends strongly on hillslope gradient and can be expressed as a

power function (Selby, 1982). This is consistent with the observations of Megahan and Ketcheson

(in press) that sediment travel distances from cross drains on Idaho Batholith roads is proportional to gradient. The curves in figures 1 and 2 are set for sediment travel distances at a 5% exceedence probability as measured by Ketcheson and Megahan (in press) for Batholith soils. Since

these soils represent some of the highest surface erosion hazard in the Interior Columbia Basin,

travel distances for erosion from other parts of the Basin are expected to be inclusive in the RMA

widths as determined from figures 1 and 2.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Ajjpandlx I-1O3&

Intermittent Streams

Figure 2.

500

400

300

200

100

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

Slope. Percent

Slope, Percent

0 20 40 60 80 100

Perennial Streams

Figure 1.

500

400

300

200

100

0
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appem«xM04Q

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Icfadwk* fro. feUffnSltec» Urn fro. Bnetl (1975) BanRfllll Width (Ft)

IOOO

too

i

10

1

II. Rangeland Streams

Interim riparian management area delineation for rangeland perennial or intermittent streams shall

be based on the flood-prone width or the extent of riparian vegetation whichever is greater.

Riparian vegetation can be delineated by aerial photographs or field inspection. Floodplain area is

essentially equivalent to flood-prone width defined by Rosgen (1994). The following steps can be

used to determine the flood-prone area. It is suggested that Field Units develop relationships

between bankfull width and drainage area or utilize existing relationships for their area.

1. Determine bankfull width from Figure A for the drainage area above the point on the stream.

2. Determine the channel type (A, B, C, F, or G; Rosgen 1994) from aerial photographs.

3. Select the entrenchment ratio (Rosgen 1994) for the particular channel type.

A, F, and G channel types = 1.4

B channel types = 2.2

C and E channel types = 5.3

4. Calculate the flood-prone area by multiplying the bankfull width and entrenchment ratio.

rifinA.

Relationship Between Bankfull Width and Drainage Area
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Ajjpandlx 1-1041

Appendix H:

Noxious Weed Control Guidelines Pertinent to an IWM Strategy

(from USDI-Bureau of Land Management, 1994)

Use the following cultural, physical, biological, and chemical control guidelines to implement and

determine the best method(s) for an integrated approach to noxious weed management.

Cultural

Prevention

1. Develop available preventive measures, such as quarantine and closure, to reduce the spread

of the infestation.

2. Determine whether policy and laws allow for the use of all preventive measures, including local

quarantine and closure.

3. If past management activities have allowed the introduction and spread of noxious weeds,

determine how to change management for selecting a treatment method.

Livestock Manipulation

1. Determine whether changes in livestock grazing will affect the target weeds, a. Reduced grazing may allow for increased competition from beneficial vegetation or just allow for more seeds

to be disseminated, b. Increased grazing may reduce beneficial vegetation or may be used to

reduce seed source.

2. Determine whether changes in movement or type of livestock is necessary to reduce or contain

the infestation due to movement of seeds on or in the animals.

3. Determine whether containing livestock in a weed free area prior to introduction to the area

would prevent new infestations.

Wildlife Manipulation

1. Determine whether wildlife or wildlife feeding programs can be managed to reduce weed

infestations.

2. Determine feasibility of changes in wildlife movement that would reduce or contain the infestation due to movement of seeds on or in the animals.

Soil Disturbance Activities

1. Revegetate all bare soil following disturbance.

2. Select plant species that will reduce the spread of noxious weeds.

3. Defer soil disturbance if possible until weeds are controlled or under management.

Rock Sources

1. Develop rock source management plans.

2. Keep utilization of rock source confined to existing contaminated roads.

3. Keep new or "clean" rock stockpiles separate from contaminated stockpiles.

4. Obtain rock from uncontaminated sources.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

AjS|»fi<«x 14042

Public Use

1. Determine most feasible land use to reduce and prevent infestations.

2. Determine whether specific public awareness programs could reduce the infestation or control

the spread of weeds.

3. Determine whether exclusion is a possibility and how it would affect the weed infestation.

Physical

Manual Control

1. Determine whether hoeing or "grubbing" will reduce (or increase) the infestation.

2. Determine whether hand pulling the weeds reduces the seed source.

Mechanical Control

1. Evaluate terrain to allow for mowing and determine whether it is an acceptable option for control of the spread of seeds.

2. Evaluate cultivation and other conventional farming practices options that could be utilized cost

effectively.

Control by Burning

1. Determine whether policy and laws allow controlled burning and address regulations regarding

smoke management.

2. Determine whether the terrain and vegetation cover allow for a controlled burn program.

3. Evaluate a controlled burn program to reduce the infestation.

4. Determine long-term effect of burning on nontarget species.

Biological

Natural Competition

1. Determine whether there are naturally occurring agents within the ecosystem which can reduce

the infestation.

2. Determine which elements affect naturally occurring control agents, a. Determine whether these

elements can be modified to reduce the negative effect on these agents, b. Determine whether

these elements can be enhanced to increase the effectiveness of these agents on the weed

infestation.

Introduced Competition

1. Determine whether biological control agents can be introduced into the ecosystem to reduce

the amount of infestation.

2. Determine which introduced biological agents provide an acceptable control method for this

infestation.

3. Evaluate if the biological control agent has been tested for adverse effects against all nontarget

species within the treatment area.

4. Determine whether the introduced biological agent can survive in the environment of the treatment area.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

AfjfHsndlx MO43

5. Determine whether policy and laws allow for the introduction of biological control agents.

6. Determine whether policy and laws allow for introduction and grazing of livestock as a biological control measure.

Chemical

Fertilization

1. Determine whether chemical fertilization would reduce the amount of weeds by increasing competition of beneficial plant species.

2. Determine whether increased nitrogen (or other nutrients) would reduce weeds due to direct

effect (for example, Curlycup gumweed).

Pesticides

1. Evaluate the acceptability of herbicides (or other pesticides) to control the infestation.

2. Determine whether pesticides are labeled for use on the target weed and use on the infested

site (consider nontarget plants, soil type, groundwater location, topography, climate, state labeling). Determine the most effective application techniques.

3. Determine the most effective and cost-effective types of conventional application equipment.

4. Determine whether properly trained personnel are available to apply the pesticides.

Literature Cited

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, 1994. Noxious weed strategy for

Oregon/Washington. Oregon State Office, Portland, Oregon. BLM/OR/WA/PT-94/36+4220.9.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

JfepMMttfcS4d44

Table 2 Last Revised 2-17-96

Forest Cluster

Activity Level Assumptions

Low Moderate High

Harvest (commercial) Alts. 1,2,7 > 0-4 4-8 8-10

(% of all forested area

treated/decade) Alts. 3-6 > 0-5 5-9 9-11

Thin (pre-commercial)

(% of all forested area treated/decade) 0-3 3-6 6-8

Decrease Road Density 50+

(% of total road miles reduced/decade) 0-25 25-50 change RDC

Watershed Restoration

(% of all forested area treated/decade) 0-3 3-6 6-8

Prescribe Burning

(% of all forested area treated/decade) 0-5 5-9 9-11

Prescribed Fire Plans

(% of all forested area for which plans

have been implemented) 0-20 20-40 40+

Key

Harvest = All commercial harvest methods (e.g. single tree selection, group selection,

shelterwood, seed tree, overstory removal, clearcut, and commercial thinning

from above or below.)

Thin = All pre-commercial thinnings used to alter forest structure, species composition, density, rate of growth, fuel ladders, fire behavior, etc.

Decrease Road Density = Permanent road closure.

Watershed Restoration = Includes increased road mtnce, improved road condition (surface and/or drainage), reduced road related erosion, road

obliteration, increased LWM, riparian plantings, in-channel

restoration, etc.

Prescribed Burning = Management ignited fire.

Prescribed Fire Plan = Allows natural ignition fires to burn when in prescription

and/or identifies areas that require prescribed burning.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appendix I-104B

Table 2R Last Revised 2-17-96

Range Cluster

Activity Level Assumptions

Low Moderate High

Livestock Management

(% of all rangeland with improved 0-6 6-12 12-20

management)

Improve Rangelands

(% of all rangeland treated/decade) 0-4 4-8 8-11

Decrease Road Density 50+

(% of total road miles reduced/decade) 0-25 25-50 change RDC

Riparian Restoration

(% of all riparian areas treated/decade) 0-25 25-50 50-75

Prescribe Burning

(% of all rangeland treated/decade) 0-3 3-6 6-9

Prescribed Fire Plan

(% of all rangeland for which plans

have been implemented) 0-20 20-40 40+

Key

Livestock Management = A summation of livestock management variables that affect

rangeland health, including grazing systems, changing riparian grazing mgnt., season of use (length and timing), number

of head, change of class, distribution, grazing deferment, and

herding.

Improve Rangelands = Capital Investments: fencing, stockwater improvements, seedings, control of invasion or spread of exotics, and non-fire

shrub and juniper control.

Decrease Road Density = Permanent road closure.

Riparian Restoration = Includes improving road condition (drainage and/or surface),

riparian plantings, in-channel restoration, and riparian exclosures.

Prescribe Burning = Management ignited fire.

Prescribed Natural Fire = Allows natural ignition fires to burn when in prescription

and/or identifies areas that require prescribed burning.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

A|jp«»«Ux M04B

Table 3 Last Revised 1-21-96

Changing Road Density Class

Calculations depicting the % of road closures

necessary to effect a change in road density class

% of roads that

Class Density Mean Multiplier would have to be

(miles/sq. mile) Density (between classes) closed to drop one

density class
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

AjJ^dlx I-1O4?

Table 3-3. Summary: Comparison of Alternatives by Activity Level, by Cluster

Cluster/Activity Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 Alt 6 Alt 7

Forest Cluster 1

Harvest L L L L L L L

Thin L L L L L L L

Decrease Road Density L L L L L L L

Watershed Restoration L M M M M M L

Prescribed Burning L L M H L M L

Prescribed Fire Plan H H H H H H H

Forest Cluster 2

Harvest M L L L L L L

Thin L L L M L M L

Decrease Road Density L L M M L M M

Watershed Restoration L M M H M M L

Prescribed Burning L L M H M M L

Prescribed Fire Plan H H H H H H H

Forest Cluster 3

Harvest H M M M M L L

Thin M L M H H M L

Decrease Road Density L L M M M H H

Watershed Restoration L M M M M M L

Prescribed Burning L L M M M M M

Prescribed Fire Plan L L L M M M H

Forest Cluster 4

Harvest H M M M H M L

Thin M M H H H H L

Decrease Road Density L L M M L M M

Watershed Restoration L L L M L M L

Prescribed Burning L L L M L M M

Prescribed Fire Plan L L L M L M M

Forest Cluster 5

Harvest H L M M M L L

Thin M M H H H H M

Decrease Road Density L M H H M M H

Watershed Restoration L L L M M M L

Prescribed Burning L L M H M H L

Prescribed Fire Plan L L M H H H M

Forest Cluster 6

Harvest M L L L M L L

Thin L L H H M H L

Decrease Road Density L L L M L L L

Watershed Restoration L L L L L L L

Prescribed Burning L L M M M M M

Prescribed Fire Plan L L M M L M M
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

A|JJXM««X 14348

Range Cluster 1

Livestock Management L M M M L M H

Improve Rangeland L L M M L M L

Decrease Road Density L L L H L M M

Riparian Restoration L L L M M M L

Prescribed Burning L L M H L H M

Prescribed Fire Plan L L M H H H H

Range Cluster 2

Livestock Management H H H H H H H

Improve Rangeland L L L L L L L

Decrease Road Density L L L L L L L

Riparian Restoration L L L M L M L

Prescribed Burning L L M H M M L

Prescribed Fire Plan H H H H H H H

Range Cluster 3

Livestock Management M H H H H H H

Improve Rangeland L L L M M M L

Decrease Road Density L L L M L L M

Riparian Restoration L L M M L L L

Prescribed Burning L L M H M M L

Prescribed Fire Plan L L M H M H H

Range Cluster 4

Livestock Management L M M M M M H

Improve Rangeland L L L M L M L

Decrease Road Density L L M M L M M

Riparian Restoration L L L M M M M

Prescribed Burning L L M M L L L

Prescribed Fire Plan L L L M L M M

Range Cluster 5

Livestock Management L M L M M H H

Improve Rangeland L L M M L L L

Decrease Road Density L L L L L L L

Riparian Restoration L L M M M M L

Prescribed Burning L L M M L M M

Prescribed Fire Plan L L L M L M H

Range Cluster 6

Livestock Management L M M M M M H

Improve Rangeland L L M H M M L

Decrease Road Density L L L M L M M

Riparian Restoration L L M M M M M

Prescribed Burning L L L L L L L

Prescribed Fire Plan L L L L L L M
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Afjpefldix 2-104&

Table? Last Revised 2-17-96

Alternative 5

"Priority Management" Areas

FOREST CLUSTER PRIMARY Priority SECONDARY Priority ~

1 Primitive Recreation Aquatics

2 Aquatics Recreation

3 Aquatics Timber

4 Timber Wildlife

5 Timber Livestock

6 Wildlife Recreation

RANGE CLUSTER PRIMARY Priority SECONDARY Priority ~

1 Livestock Timber

2 Recreation Aquatics

3 Recreation Wildlife

4 Wildlife —

5 Livestock Recreation

6 Livestock Wildlife
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

A&KMttHx M0©0

Table 9 Last Revised 2-12-96

Overall Management Strategy

by Alternative

(Summarization of General Management Emphasis by Forest Cluster)

ALTERNATIVE

Forest

 1 r> i A * c 7 Cluster 123456 7

1 C C C-R C-R C C-R C

2 P-C C R R C-R R C

3 P P-C R R R R C-R

4 P P-C R-P R P R C-R

5 P C-R R R R R C-R

6 P-C C C-R R R-P C-R C

Used to generate Alternative maps

Table 9R Last Revised 2-12-96

Overall Management Strategy

by Alternative

(Summarization of General Management Emphasis by Range Cluster)

ALTERNATIVE

Range 1 6

Cluster

 n 2 3 * 5

_

 6 7

1 P P-C R-P R R-P R C-R

2 C C C C-R C C-R C

3 P-C C C-R R C-R C-R C

4 P P-C R-P R P-C R C-R

5 P P-C R R P-C C-R C

6 P P-C R-P R R-P R C-R

Used to generate Alternative maps
Af)p«Hidlx tddftlj

This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Table 10 Last Revised 2-10-96

HARVEST

ALTERNATIVES 1,2 &7

ACRES (in thousands per decade)

Forest FOREST LOW MODERATE HIGH

Acres (M) CLUSTER 0-4% 4-8% 8-10%

5,156 1 0-200 200-400 400-500

10,724 2 0-450 450-850 850-1,050

3,955 3 0-150 150-300 300-400

9,296 4 0-350 350-750 750-950

7,560 5 0-300 300-600 600-750

2,687 6 0-100 100-200 200-250

ALTERNATIVES 3, 4, 5 & 6

ACRES (in thousands per decade)

Forest FOREST LOW MODERATE HIGH

Acres (M) CLUSTER 0-5% 5-9% 9-11%

5,156 1 0-250 250-450 450-500

10,724 2 0-550 550-950 950-1,200

3,955 3 0-200 200-350 350-450

9,296 4 0-450 450-850 850-1,000

7,560 5 0-400 400-700 700-850

2,687 6 0-150 150-250 250-300

THIN

ACRES (in thousands per decade)

Forest FOREST LOW MODERATE HIGH

Acres (M) CLUSTER 0-3% 3-6% 6-8%

5,156 1 0-150 150-300 300-400

10,724 2 0-300 300-650 650-850

3,955 3 0-100 100-250 250-300

9,296 4 0-300 300-550 550-750

7,560 5 0-250 250-450 450-600

2,687 6 0-100 100-150 150-200
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appdtidix 24382

PRESCRIBED BURNING

ACRES (in thousands per decade)

Forest FOREST LOW MODERATE HIGH

Acres (M) CLUSTER 0-5% 5-9% 9-11%

5,156 1 0-250 250-450 450-550

10,724 2 0-550 550-950 950-1,200

3,955 3 0-200 200-350 350-450

9,296 4 0-450 450-850 850-1,000

7,560 5 0-400 400-700 700-850

2,687 6 0-150 150-250 250-300

WATERSHED RESTORATION

ACRES (in thousands per decade)

Forest FOREST LOW MODERATE HIGH

Acres (M) CLUSTER 0-3% 3-6% 6-8%

5,156 1 0-150 150-300 300-400

10,724 2 0-300 300-650 650-850

3,955 3 0-100 100-250 250-300

9,296 4 0-300 300-550 550-750

7,560 5 0-250 250-450 450-600

2,687 6 0-100 100-150 150-200
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

&$$6*idix I-1&53

Table 10R Last Revised 2-10-96

LIVESTOCK MANAGEMENT

ACRES (in thousands per decade)

Forest RANGE LOW MODERATE HIGH

Acres (M) CLUSTER 0-6% 6-12% 12-20%

1,632 1 0-100 100-195

103 2 0-6 6-12 12-20

107 3 0-6 6-12 12-20

32 4 0-2 2-4

13,367 5 0-800 800-1,600 1,600-2,670

14,640 6 0-880 880-1,760 1,760-2,925

IMPROVE RANGELANDS

ACRES (in thousands per decade)

Forest RANGE LOW MODERATE HIGH

Acres (M) CLUSTER 0-4% 4-8% 8-11%

1,632 1 0-65 65-130 130-180

103 2 0-5 5-10

107 3 0-5 5-10

32 4 0-5

13,367 5 0-535 535-1,070 1,070-1,470

14,640 6 0-585 585-1,170 1,170-1,610

PRESCRIBED BURNING

ACRES (in thousands per decade)

Forest RANGE LOW MODERATE HIGH

Acres (M) CLUSTER 0-3% 3-6% 6-9%

1,632 1 0-50 50-100 100-150

103 2 0-5 5-10

107 3 0-5 5-10

32 4 0-5

13,367 5 0-400 400-800

14,640 6 0-440 440-880
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appftfidlx 14064

RIPARIAN RESTORATION

ACRES (in thousands per decade)

RANGE LOW MODERATE HIGH

CLUSTER 0-25% 25-50% 50-75%

1 0-10 10-20

2 0-1

3 0-1

4 0-1

5 0-65 65-135

6 0-75 75-145
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appendix 1-106$

Eastside & UCRB Alternatives for Evaluation Chapter 3 - Draft

Desired Range of Future Conditions

Alternative 1 — No Action

The following Desired Range of Future Conditions (DRFC) was derived from the various individual

land-use plans and represents a general summary of conditions expected under those plans,

intended as a comparison to the DRFCs expected under the action alternatives. However, no single current plan contains all of the DRFC items listed below. For precise wording of desired future

conditions for an individual Forest or BLM District, consult the appropriate plan.

Social

Many forested areas include Wilderness, scenic areas, Research Natural Areas, unroaded lands,

old growth reserves, and other locations not subject to timber management activities. These areas

would be influenced by fire, natural events, recreation, and other uses. Larger expanses of forests

in middle to late structural stages will be evident, with patches of intolerant or climax species.

Other areas will show more open, subclimax serai stages due to extensive use of prescribed fire.

Some areas show evidence of younger serai stages due to stand replacing wildfire. Prescribed

and natural fires and other activities have reduced evidence of forest insect and diseases in most

areas.

All plans identify areas where varied recreational opportunities from wilderness, special interest

areas, non-motorized and roadless areas, and motorized dispersed activities are provided.

National Forests and BLM Districts also provide developed recreation areas and facilities and

have programs that seek to maintain scenic quality. National Forests along the Cascade crest

emphasize management of recreation and wilderness resources. Certain lands and features are

identified and incorporated into a system of classified or special interest areas, areas of critical

environmental concern, or research natural areas to protect and manage unique values such as

scenic quality, wildlife, raptors, sensitive plants, historic sites, cultural resources, recreation opportunities, and others. Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers have also been designated, or found

administratively suitable for designation, and managed to conserve their values.

Changing forest and rangeland conditions also influence recreation activities, settings, and experience opportunities. At the same time, demand for recreation of all types will grow substantially.

Both agencies respond to this increased demand by providing additional recreation opportunities.

In some areas more roads provide a base of roaded recreation opportunities, heavily used and

very popular. In other areas, increased road closures provide for more primitive or semi-primitive

opportunities. Additional developed facilities, restored and maintained recreation sites, expanded

and well maintained trail systems, and new winter use areas are a few of the means used to meet

the demand. Visual quality will be emphasized in the important recreation and related areas; natural appearing conditions featuring larger trees or other desirable vegetation will be created and

maintained through management. Some reduction in the amount of unroaded area has occurred.

But wilderness, unroaded and other areas continue to meet some of the demand for primitive

opportunities across the region. However, frequency of encounters will be noticeably increased.

All areas continue to emphasize their feature attractions such as wild rivers, scenic areas, wildlife

and fish, botanical, geologic and historic areas and interpreted cultural resource properties.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

A|JJ»«dlKM{}6B

Economics

The "traditional" industries that use and produce resources from public lands will continue to contribute to rural economic activity. Economic activity will be focused on recreation, timber, livestock

forage, water, and other locally and regionally important resources.

Resource Management

Forests, shrub, and grass lands managed by the cooperating agencies continue to provide a mix

of natural resource-based goods and services. Management focuses on providing resource outputs including timber, livestock forage, huntable wildlife, and minerals while also providing for

other multiple uses and values including aesthetics, recreation opportunities, wildlife, and clean air

and water. Current management has improved some conditions on public lands. Resource management emphasis continues to vary among National Forests and BLM Districts based on the

character of the land and resources, and public interests.

On National Forest and BLM forested areas, the general thrust is to emphasize or accommodate

sustained timber, wood fiber, and livestock forage production in an environmentally prudent manner, while managing and protecting other resources and values. Under this approach, timber harvest and livestock outputs are planned to be near levels produced at the time plans were

approved. Timber production is planned only in areas classified as suitable for such production.

Because BLM, and some National Forests, management tends to be more in grass and shrub

land areas, their general perspective is to produce forage for livestock grazing, wildlife, and wild

horses at or near levels when plans were approved. Under current management, timber and livestock management are integated and coordinated with the maintenance or enhancement of

wildlife and fish habitat, scenic quality, recreation opportunities, and other resource values to

achieve overall, multiple-use goals and objectives.

In general, most lands are open and accessible for mineral resource and gas and oil exploration

and development, provided that unnecessary and undue degradation of public lands does not

result from operations.

Riparian Areas

Riparian areas and stream habitat conditions have improved as a result of protection and management, including extensive stream habitat enhancement and restoration work. Management has

promoted desirable riparian vegetative species, density and structural conditions, floodplain and

bank stability and resiliency, appropriate sediment budgets and water temperatures, and channel

morphological processes and characteristics. All conditions interact to support improved habitat,

benefiting fish and wildlife across the region. Improved riparian and instream conditions move fish

habitat capability toward its potential. Some previously imperiled and other sensitive fish species

show an increasing or stable trend in abundance and distribution.

Uses are coordinated to enhance fisheries, water quality, and riparian resources, focusing on

maintaining, protecting, and restoring natural functions to achieve healthy and productive ecological conditions. Many Forests and BLM Districts plan to maintain or enhance fish habitat capability

and riparian resources, often through restoration and improvement activities.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

A}jjx*ftdlx I-1QS7

Soil and Water

Across the region, soil function, processes and productivity is maintained or improved through

application of prevention mitigation, or restoration measures. Effective ground cover is present in

amounts and distribution to prevent erosion. Water quality is enhanced through management, so

that most streams are providing cool, clear, clean water. Quality water is even more precious than

at present; demand will be high from all users. However, the available water supply from forest

and rangelands remains essentially unchanged, although summer low flows are increased. In the

long-term, air quality is good. Although use of prescribed burning has increased, application of

best management practices, expanded fiber utilization, and reduced catastrophic wildfire contribute toward quality air.

Protection and maintenance of soil and water resources and productivity is emphasized by all

National Forests and BLM Districts.

Rangelands

Grass-shrub uplands evidence steady improvement and positive trends in vegetative and ecologic

conditions. Rangelands have increased amount and production of desirable shrubs, forbs, and

grasses and improved structural diversity. Downward trends have been arrested, damaged conditions restored, and the spread of invasive and noxious weed has been slowed or stopped. Most

areas are meeting or moving toward objectives. Changes have occurred through active grazing

management and range betterment activities. As a result, authorized livestock forage use levels

are near current levels, and output levels are maintained on a sustained basis.

Other DRFC elements include:

• Upland soils exhibit infiltration and permeability rates that are appropriate to soil type, climate,

and landform.

• Riparian-wetland areas are in properly functioning condition.

• Stream channel morphology (including but not limited to gradient, width/depth ratio, channel

roughness and sinuosity) and functions are appropriate for the climate and landform.

• Healthy, productive and diverse populations of native species exist and are maintained.

Forestlands

Forests feature a diversity of stand conditions. Portions of the landscape are heavily influenced by

commodity production and recreation use, while other locations are largely natural appearing. On

lands suitable for timber production, forests show evidence of management activity at the stand

level. Use of available technologies result in a forest managed to favor serai species (such as

ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine, western larch, Douglas-fir) with reduced stand densities,

improved growth and yields, restored and maintained soil productivity, and prompt reforestation

achieved with genetically improved trees. Use of prescribed fire and thinning to manage vegetation and reduce fuel loads and ladders is also evident. Some areas emphasize evenaged stand

management. Horizontal diversity exists with a variety of stand patch sizes (<40 acres) and

shapes visible. Stands are in a range of serai structural condition, primarily early (regenerated

stands) to middle stages (stands near 20" dbh and up to 120 years old). Vertical diversity and a

more naturally appearing forest, with larger, older trees and several canopy layers exist in areas

where unevenaged management is emphasized, or long rotations are used. As a result of man-
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Afjpandlx X-1G38

agement over the long-term, projected annual timber yields of desired timber sizes and quality are

produced; long-term timber harvest sustainability is attained. Increased transitory forage will be

available for livestock, big game, and other wildlife use.

Disturbances

As a result of prescribed fire, thinning and insect abatement efforts, the health, vigor, and diversity

of the forest has improved. Disturbance events, including fire, insects, and diseases are within or

close to natural range of variation and effect. Ecosystems are healthier and have improved function. Resistance to epidemics has increased and undesirable impacts of insects, diseases, and

weeds have been mitigated through integrated pest management.

Wildlife Habitat

The amount and diversity of wildlife habitat will be maintained or improved through time. Late/old

serai forests, and grass-shrublands, exist in varying sized blocks and well distributed patterns

across the landscape. Snags and dead/down tree habitat continues to be available at planned and

sustained levels. Some decline in old growth and dead/down tree dependent species populations

will occur where intensive forest management activities reduce the total amount of these key habitats. Big game species continue to be featured in many areas. Ongoing management of forest and

rangeland habitat components and conditions (such as vegetative cover, forage, and roads), and

key areas maintain big game populations near state wildlife agency objectives. Hunting continues

to be enjoyed throughout the region. Improved forest, grass-shrubland, and riparian area conditions support and benefit a variety of other species by increasing the quality, quantity, and variety

of habitat. Such species include water fowl, upland game, raptors, and nongame species.

Management has helped to create the long-term changes and improvements that contribute

toward restoring some sensitive species, and toward recovery of several listed species.

On many Forest and BLM Districts, big game habitat needs are emphasized through management of vegetation to achieve specified conditions. Old growth, dead and down tree habitats and

late successional tall shrub habitats are provided. In timber harvest areas, old growth and dead

and down tree habitat is retained to meet wildlife requirements (See R-6 Regional Guide and

NFMA36CFR219.27).

Alternative 2

Under Alternative 2 forests and rangelands managed by the Forest Service and BLM continue to

provide a mix of natural resource based goods and services. Rangelands show improving conditions and trends discussed in Alternative 1 desired future conditions. On forests areas not subject

to timber management activities, desired future conditions are also the same as described in

Alternative 1. On areas subject to timber management and/or areas within designated riparian

areas of key/priority watersheds, some differences in DFCs (from Alternative 1) apply.

The following DRFC applies to Forest Service- or BLM-administered lands identified in RACFISH

and INFISH. The DRFC is to maintain or restore:

1) Water quality to a degree that provides for stable and productive riparian and aquatic

ecosystems;
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appendix J406&

2) Stream channel integrity, channel processes, and the sediment regime (including the elements

of timing, volume, and character of sediment input and transport) under which the riparian and

aquatic ecosystems developed;

3) Instream flows to support healthy riparian and aquatic habitats, the stability and effective functioning of stream channels, and the ability to route flood discharges;

4) Natural timing and variability of the water table elevation in meadows and wetlands;

5) Diversity and productivity of native and desired non-native plant communities in riparian zones;

6) Riparian vegetation to:

a) provide an amount and distribution of large woody debris characteristic of natural aquatic

and riparian ecosystems

b) provide adequate summer and winter thermal regulation within the riparian and aquatic

zones;

c) help achieve rates of surface erosion, bank erosion, and channel migration characteristic of

those under which the communities developed;

7) Riparian and aquatic habitats necessary to foster the unique genetic fish stocks that evolved

within the specific geoclimatic region;

8) Habitat to support populations of well-distributed native and desired non-native plant, vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that contribute to the viability of riparian-dependent communities.

Desired Range of Future Conditions Common to Alternatives 3-7

The desired range of future conditions (DRFC) is a summary of the conditions desired or expected in 50 to 100 years as a result of meeting objectives. The DRFC is expressed as a range of

processes and/or conditions that provide a vision of the long-term condition of the land.

The following DRFC applies to ALL action alternatives. In addition, each alternative will be

described by a specific DRFC that is expected in 50-100 years.

• State and Federal resource management-related legal requirements are met.

• Tribal treaty rights and other Federal trust responsibilities are met.

• State, county, and tribal governments are involved in Federal agency planning, decision-making,

and implementation of programs.

• A broad range of recreational opportunities are available.

• Vegetation and fuel management strategies reduce the risk of life and property loss from wildfire.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appendix 1-1Q6D

• There is no downward trend in quality and quantity of riparian areas, wetlands, and lakes. Some

are showing an upward trend.

• Water quality meets Clean Water Act requirements and State water quality standards and contributes to habitat quality and stream and lake conditions.

• Most soils have at least minimal protective cover, soil organic matter, and coarse woody material

(in woodlands and forests). Soils have adequate physical properties for vegetation growth and

hydrologic function. Physical, chemical, and biological processes in most soils function similarly

to soils that have not been harmfully disturbed. Microbiotic crusts are stable or increasing in coverage on all suitable sites.

• In the dry forest type, stand density, species composition, structure, fuel loading and distribution,

and duff depth are moving toward that which is typically associated with a natural fire regime.

The majority of fires are nonlethal underburns, generally occurring on more gentle terrain and

rocky areas at less that 25 year intervals. Some lethal fires, that kill the overstory, continue to

occur where topography funnels winds, in geographically windy areas, or low productivity sites

where trees rarely become tall enough for their crowns to survive flames. The smallest proportion of fires are mixed severity.

• Dominant species in the dry forest type are resistant to low intensity fires. Stands of ponderosa

pine are pure mixed with Douglas-fir or grand fir. The dry forest group is predominately an open

community.

• In the moist forest type, mixed severity fires occur intermingled with surface and crown fires.

Stand density, species compositions, structure, fuel loading and distribution, and duff depth are

moving toward that which is typically associated with the natural and highly variable fire regime.

The majority of fires are mixed severity at intervals ranging from 25 to 150 years. Nonlethal fires

occur on benches and ridges, and fires lethal to the overstory occur on upland slopes.

• Dominant species in the moist forest type are resistant to low and moderate intensity fires.

Stands of Douglas-fir, lodgepole pine, or ponderosa pine are pure or mixed with western larch,

western white pine, grand fir/white fir, western hemlock/western redcedar or Engelmann

spruce/subalpine fir.

• In the cold forest type, stand density, species composition, structure, fuel loading and distribution, and duff depth are moving toward that which is typically associated with a natural fire

regime. Nonlethal underburns occur on benches and ridges where whitebark and lodgepole pine

dominate. The lethal crown fire regime is found on moist to wet steep slopes. The most common

fires are mixed severity, which usually occur intermingled with nonlethal and lethal fires during

one or a series of fire events, with a frequency ranging from 25 to 150 years.

• Dominant species in the cold forest type are somewhat resistant to low intensity fires. Stands of

lodgepole pine, Douglas-fir, or whitebark pine are pure or mixed with Engelmann spruce/subalpine fir, mountain hemlock, whitebark pine/subalpine larch, or aspen.

• Annual rate of spread of new infestations of noxious weeds is declining in response to aggressive weed management programs.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appendix 1-1061

• Dense shrublands are reduced in extent.

• Juniper encroachment into previously unoccupied communities is declining.

• Shrub communities are of sufficient size and of appropriate arrangement to enhance connectivity among similar habitats.

• Species viability is not limited by habitat conditions.

• Natural Areas and habitats supporting high species endemism or biodiversity are present and

contribute to species viability.

• There are fewer roads in riparian areas and in the uplands, where road miles causing accelerated erosion have been reduced. Riparian areas are stable and free of alteration to the natural

streamflow and sediment regimes. In some areas, open roads are stable.

• Watersheds are stable and provide for the capture, storage and safe release of water appropriate to soil type, climate, and landform.

• Healthy, productive and diverse populations of native plants are maintained or obtained relative

to site potential.

• Rangelands reseeded with mixtures including nonnative plants are functioning to maintain adequate life form diversity, production, nutrient cycling, energy flow, and the hydrologic cycle.

• Monocultures of undesirable plants (cheatgrass, medusahead wildrye, and noxious weeds) at

least provide for soil stability and offer opportunitites for improved vigor and numbers of remnant

native or seeded plants relative to site condition.

• Habitats are suitable to maintain viable populations of listed and sensitive species.

• Riparian/wetland vegetation structure and diversity are, or are making significant progress

toward, functioning properly.

• Stream channels and floodplains are, or are making significant progress toward, functioning

properly.

• Surface and groundwater on public lands fully support, or are making significant progress toward

fully supporting, designated beneficial uses described in the State water quality standards.

• Category 1 Watersheds: Watershed processes, riparian and aquatic habitat conditions, and

their interactions provide habitat conditions that support strong populations of native species.

Although previously introduced species are present, they do not dominate the aquatic community. Large blocks of continuous high quality, diverse habitat is provided spatially and temporally

within the watersheds. Connectivity within the watershed is at least maintained, and all native

aquatic biota are present, including migratory forms. These watersheds provide a system of

habitats large enough and well dispersed enough to be resilient in the face of large-scale disturbance. Category 1 watersheds provide conditions necessary for the long-term persistence of

native aquatic communities and are important sources for refounding populations in other water-
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

AptJeadJx 1-1062

sheds. While human disturbances (management activities) have and do occur, natural processes predominate or are not altered to a point beyond that which the native biota evolved and can

persist over the long term. Past management activities which affect watershed processes and

aquatic and riparian habitats are mitigated, and new management activities do not affect watershed processes in a manner that would be adverse to aquatic biota.

Alternative 3

In addition to the DRFC elements common to all action alternatives, the following is the vision of

the long-term (50-100 years) condition of the land under Alternative 3:

FOREST

In the dry forest Potential Vegetation Group (PVG), successional and disturbance processes are

maintained through endemic insect and disease disturbances, vegetation management on high

priority sites to re-establish dominance of old single story ponderosa pine, and fire. Forest species

and composition are consistent with the following fire regime:

Nonlethal Underburns Lethal Fires Mixed Severity Fires

60-70% 10-20% 15-25%

There is a moderate abundance and persistence of old single story forest, dominated by ponderosa pine with a moderate component of Douglas-fir and a minor component of grand fir.

Stands are fairly well distributed in a mosaic of age classes (table A).

In the moist forest PVG, successional and disturbance processes are maintained through endemic insect and disease disturbances, windthrow often aided by root rot, vegetation management on

high priority sites to re-establish western white pine, and fire. Forest species and composition are

consistent with the following fire regime:

Nonlethal Underburns Lethal Fires Mixed Severity Fires

5-15% 30-40% 50-60%

There is a moderate abundance and persistence of young forest consisting of western white pine,

western larch, and ponderosa pine with a minor component of grand fir. Stands are distributed in

a mosaic of age classes (table A).

In the cold forest PVG, successional and disturbance processes are maintained through endemic

and epidemic insect and disease disturbances, vegetation management on high priority sites to

re-establish whitebark pine, and fire. Forest species and composition are consistent with the following fire regime:

Nonlethal Underburns Lethal Fires Mixed Severity Fires

5-15% 15-25% 65-75%

There is a moderate component of young forest consisting of serai whitebark pine along with

Engelmann spruce/subalpine fir. Stands are distributed in large-patch mosaics of age classes

(table A).
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appendix 1-1063

The forested potential vegetation groups have an overall range of structural stages as follows:

Table A. Desired Structural Stages, Alt. 3

PVG |Hegen | Young | Old Multl | Old Single | Other*

Distribution (expressed as a % of the PVG)

Dry 10-20 25-35 20-30 20-40 0-15

Moist 15-25 50-60 15-25 5-15

Cold 15-25 45-55 20-30 5-10 1-2

Shade-Intolerant Species (expressed as a % of the structural stages)

Dry 90-100 60-70 50-70 90-100

Moist 75-85 70-75 50-75 90-100

Cold 75-80 60-70 35-50 80-100

*refers to understory of grasses, shrubs, forbs

Forest wildlife habitat. The needs of forest-dependent wildlife species are met by the presence

of the necessary structures and composition, ecological processes, and ecosystem functions.

Forested land contains habitat attributes of old forests. Natural areas with high species endemism

or biodiversity are present and contribute to species viability and the delisting of threatened or

endangered species. Amounts and distribution of habitat attributes are increased where needed

to meet the needs of endemic species and species with the largest home range requirements.

Some blocks of old forest habitats connect areas of similar vegetation. Human activities are at levels that allow sufficient useable habitat for all species to be represented and well distributed,

although species densities may be variable. Management activities are dispersed, except in areas

following major disturbances such as large fires and insect infestations. In many forest areas,

some roads are closed (seasonal or permanent), or located to achieve the desired wildlife habitat

conditions.

RANGELANDS

Rangelands reflect a mosaic of multiple-aged shrubs, forbs, and native and exotic perennial

grasses. There is a slight management emphasis on maintaining a grass-dominated plant community in the shrublands, although forbs and shrubs are a substantial part of the plant community.

Most seedings have been diversified by the addition of various forb and shrub species. New infestations of noxious weeds, especially when located in vegetation types highly susceptible to invasion, are controlled, but most existing large infestations remain and continue to spread along their

boundaries. Control that results in some reduction of existing large infestations is prioritized at a

site-specfic level and directed by local input, especially for species that are problematic on a project area-wide level (yellow starthistle, diffuse knapweed, spotted knapweed, and leafy spurge).

Western juniper is being reduced by various treatments on rangelands. Yet, the overall amount

remains about the same since the extent of new invasions equals the extent of existing juniperdominated areas being treated.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appendix 1-1064

Microbiotic crust cover is improving in shallow soil areas. Microbiotic crusts are not declining in

other rangeland plant communities. Prescribed burning and prescribed natural fire is apparent,

although the burning is not continuous and is prescribed as mosaic. Altered sagebrush steppe is

maintained at existing levels with emphasis on preventing the spread of cheatgrass to adjacent

areas. Greenstripping and other fire breaks are apparent along roads and along the altered sagebrush steppe boundaries.

Potential Vegetation Groups (PVGs)

Dry Grass PVG

Forty to 60 percent of the fires in this group are nonlethal, burning in hebaceous vegetation at

less than 25-year intervals. The remaining fires are lethal, or mixtures of nonlethal and lethal,

causing mortality of overstory shrubs or conifers. Fifty to 70 percent of the area is dominated by

native grasses and forbs with minimal conifer and shrub encroachment.

Dry Shrub PVG

About 85-95 percent of the fires in this group are lethal, causing overstory mortality in stages

dominated by shrubs and conifers at 25- to 75-year intervals. On perennial bunchgrass dominated

sites, nonlethal fires predominate at 25- to 75-year intervals.

Forty to 60 percent of the area in this group is dominated by native grasses and forbs with an

overstory layer of shrubs. Five to 20 percent of the area is dominated by native grass and forb

communities. The remaining area is dominated by dense shrub communities with declining herbaceous layers, by annual grasses, or by seedings of exotic grasses and other plants.

Cool Shrub PVG

Eighty to 95 percent of fires in this group are lethal, causing overstory mortality in stages dominated by shrubs and conifers at 26- to 150-year intervals, with higher frequencies on more productive

sites. Five to 15 percent of fires are nonlethal within herbaceous-dominated stages at intervals of

less than 25 years.

Fifty to 70 percent of the area in this group is dominated by native grasses and forbs with an overstory layer of shrubs. Ten to 30 percent of the area contains mixtures of perennial grasses and

forbs. Conifers are dominant on less than 20 percent of the area.

Rangeland wildlife habitat. Rangelands have the necessary structure and composition, ecological processes, and ecosystem functions to meet most needs of Federal and State listed and sensitive rangeland-dependent wildlife species. To enhance wildlife forage production, rehabilitation or

restoration of native perennial bunchgrass has been accomplished. Natural Areas and areas of

high species endemism or biodiversity are present and contribute to species viability, but gains in

species viability are moderate. Vegetation is appropriate for the site with multiple age classes of

shrubs and grass being common. These habitats are becoming less fragmented and more connected due to increasing abundance of native vegetation. Blocks of similar habitats are fairly well

connected with areas of similar vegetation. Human activities are at a level that allows most

species to maintain a desired distribution, but species densities may be low. In many rangeland

areas, roads are closed or located to achieve the desired resource conditions. Management activi-
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appendix 1-1065

ties are dispersed and infrequent. In some situations, human activities require seasonal restrictions in selected habitats.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC

Social and economic systems are minimally affected by adjustments or updates to Forest Service

of BLM land-use plans.

Local public needs and desires continue to influence levels of commodity and noncommodity outputs.

Customary uses continue and stability improves for the participant customers (firms, ranches,

etc.).

Reductions in commodity outputs are minimized and reflect either changes in ecosystem health or

minimum levels needed to achieve compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

Payments to local units of governments continue and generally are stable within a normally

accepted range.

AQUATIC — RIPARIAN — WATERSHEDS

Riparian areas in Proper Functioning Condition are managed to maintain that condition, within

their site potential, with no downward trends. Tall trees, moderate or large in diameter, within riparian areas are infrequent. Some riparian areas are connected to the streams and uplands, unfragmented by roads and openings, and free of barriers to species migration. On rangelands, some

riparian area soils are vegetated with native deep-rooted plants and shrubs. Riparian woodlands

are rare but increasing on forested lands. Wetlands are stable but not common across the lower

gradient valley bottoms.

Forested streams in Category 2 and portions of Category 3 watersheds are moderately productive and habitat is becoming complex and diverse, supporting native aquatic species. Instream,

bank, and overhead cover, and structure provided by large wood and willows, are moderate and

increasing. Large deep pools in lower gradient streams are fairly common. Rangeland streams

and forested streams in portions of Category 3 watersheds are low in productivity, and have habitat that is simple and uniform, supporting aquatic species that require low to moderate quality

habitat. Instream, bank, and overhead cover, and structure provided by large wood and willows,

are low to moderate. Substrate is largely homogeneous and tends to be of finer size than characteristic for the geoclimatic setting. Large deep pools in lower gradient streams are infrequent.

Some portions of the landscape have minimal protective soil cover, organic matter, and coarse

woody material. Most biomass is stored in smaller plant parts and as litter. Vegetative growth and

hydrologic function are moderately impaired in some areas.

Roads in riparian areas are frequent but stable. Some road corridors from new roads are apparent. The landscape is moderately fragmented in appearance. Riparian vegetation separate and

disconnected from upslope vegetation.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

AjJjKMidJx M066

Aquatic species habitat. Water quality and aquatic habitat are moving towards watershed, riparian, and aquatic habitat goals within Category 2 and portions of Category 3 watersheds.

Restoration strategies are implemented on nearly all high-risk sites within Category 2 watersheds,

allowing recovery of watershed, riparian, water quality, and aquatic conditions characteristic for

the geoclimatic setting. Improved aquatic habitat conditions allow threatened or endangered

(TES) aquatic species populations to stabilize and expand. Major river corridor habitat and water

quality conditions are improving.

The following DRFC applies to Forest Service- or BLM-administered lands identified in PACFISH

and INFISH. The DRFC is to maintain or restore:

1) Water quality to a degree that provides for stable and productive riparian and aquatic

ecosystems;

2) Stream channel integrity, channel processes, and the sediment regime (including the elements

of timing, volume, and character of sediment input and transport) under which the riparian and

aquatic ecosystems developed;

3) Instream flows to support healthy riparian and aquatic habitats, the stability and effective function of stream channels, and the ability to route flood discharges;

4) Natural timing and variability of the water table elevation in meadows and wetlands;

5) Diversity and productivity of native and desired non-native plant communities in riparian zones;

6) Riparian vegetation to:

a) provide an amount and distribution of large woody debris characteristic of natural aquatic

and riparian ecosystems;

b) provide adequate summer and winter thermal regulation within the riparian and aquatic

zones;

c) help achieve rates of surface erosion, bank erosion, and channel migration characteristic of

those under which the communities developed;

7) riparian and aquatic habitats necessary to foster the unique genetic fish stocks that evolved

within the specific geoclimatic region;

8) habitat to support populations of well-distributed native and desired non-native plant, vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that contribute to the viability of riparian-dependent

communities.

Alternative 4

In addition to the DRFC elements common to all action alternatives, the following is the vision of

the long-term (50-100 years) condition of the land under Alternative 4:

FOREST

In the dry forest Potential Vegetation Group (PVG), successional and disturbance processes are

restored and maintained through aggressive vegetation management, endemic insect and disease disturbances, and fire. Forest species and composition are consistent with the following fire

regime:
Nonlethal Underburns Lethal Fires Mixed Severity Fires

75-85% 5-15% 5-15%

There is an abundance and persistence of old single story forest, dominated by ponderosa pine

with a moderate component of Douglas-fir and a minor component of grand fir. Stands are well

distributed in a mosaic of age classes (table B).

In the moist forest PVG, successional and disturbance processes are restored and maintained

through aggressive vegetation management; endemic insect and disease disturbances; windthrow, often aided by root rot; and fire. Forest species and composition are consistent with the following fire regime:

Nonlethal Underburns Lethal Fires Mixed Severity Fires

10-20% 20-30% 55-65%

There is an abundance and persistence of old forest dominated by Douglas-fir, lodgepole pine,

and ponderosa pine in the single story structural stage. Serai western white pine dominates the

young forest structural stage. Stands are well distributed in a mosaic of age classes (table B).

In the cold forest PVG, successional and disturbance processes are maintained through endemic

insect and disease disturbances, vegetation management, and fire. Forest species and composition are consistent with the following fire regime:

Nonlethal Underburns Lethal Fires Mixed Severity Fires

5-15% 5-15% 75-85%

There is an abundance and persistence of old forest dominated by lodgepole pine and Douglas-fir

in the multi-layer structural stage, and the young forest stages are dominated by serai whitebark

pine with a moderate component of Engelmann spruce/subalpine fir. Stands are distributed in

large-patch mosaics of age classes (table B).

The potential vegetation groups have an overall range of structural stages as follows:

Table B. Desired Structural Stages, Alt. 4

This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Ajjjuandix 14068

Forest wildlife habitat. The needs of forest-dependent wildlife species are met by the structure

and composition, ecological processes, and ecosystem functions. Habitat attributes of old forests

are abundant. Natural Areas with high species endemism or biodiversity are common and contribute to species viability and the delisting of threatened or endangered species. Management is

designed to increase amounts and distribution of habitat attributes where needed to be sufficient

to meet the needs of endemic species and species with the largest home range requirements.

Blocks of old forest habitats are large and connect with areas of similar forest types. Human activities are at levels that allow most species to maintain an adequate distribution in forested environments. In the long term, management activities are dispersed and infrequent; in the short term,

management activities are common. In many forest areas, many roads are closed (seasonal or

permanent), or located to achieve the desired wildlife habitat conditions.

RANGELANDS

Rangelands reflect a mosaic of multiple-aged shrubs, forbs, and native grasses with management

emphasis on maintaining a diverse native plant community. Seedings have been diversified by the

addition of various native grasses, forbs, and shrubs, and have been converted to native plants

where possible. New infestations of noxious weeds are not common across the landscape and

existing large infestations are slowly declining.

Western juniper-dominated sites are rare across the rangelands. The exception to this is rock outcrops, ridges, mesas, or other areas not prone to fire, which typically have shallow soils with little

accumulation of fine fuels. Some areas have diverse plant communities with low densities of western juniper as well as a full complement of native understory shrubs, grasses, and forbs.

Microbiotic crust cover has improved in all dry shrub types. Microbiotic crusts are also increasing

in other rangeland plant communities. Prescribed burning and prescribed natural fire have maintained the diverse, mosaic shrub steppe plant communities as well as the grassland communities

that are subject to conifer encroachment. Most of the altered sagebrush steppe consists of

diverse perennial plant communities, with the grass components dominated by both native and

exotic perennial grasses. Greenstripping and other fire breaks are still apparent along roads and

along the remaining altered sagebrush steppe boundaries.

Potential Vegetation Groups

Dry Grass Potential Vegetation Group

At least 60 to 80 percent of the fires in this group are nonlethal, burning in herbaceous vegetation

at less than 25-year intervals. The remaining fires are lethal, or mixtures of nonlethal and lethal,

causing mortality of overstory shrubs or conifers. Sixty to 80 percent of the area is dominated by

native grasses and forbs without conifer and shrub encroachment.

Dry Shrub Potential Vegetation Group

About 80-90 percent of the fires in this group are lethal, causing overstory mortality in stages

dominated by shrubs and conifers at 25- to 75-year intervals. On perennial bunchgrass dominated

sites, nonlethal fires predominate at 25- to 75-year intervals.
This information is excerpted from the February 1996 version of the Eastside and Upper Columbia River Basin Preliminary Draft EISs.

It is provided here for reference only. At the time of this publication, the EISs were still in draft form. To see the specific objectives and

standards as they have evolved, please refer to the EIS documents directly.

Appendix 14&8&

Fifty to 70 percent of the area in this group is dominated by native grasses and forbs with an overstory layer of shrubs. Ten to 25 percent of the area is dominated by native grass and forb communities. The remaining area is dominated by closed shrub communities with declining herbaceous

layers, by seedings of exotic and native grasses and other plants, and in a small area by annual

grasses and noxious weeds.

Cool Shrub Potential Vegetation Group

Seventy to 90 percent of fires in this group are lethal, causing overstory mortality in stages dominated by shrubs and conifers at 16- to 150-year intervals, with higher frequencies on more productive sites. Ten to 30 percent of fires are nonlethal within herbaceous-dominated stages at intervals of less than 25 years.

Sixty to 80 percent of the area in this group is dominated by native grasses and forbs with an

overstory layer of shrubs. Fifteen to 40 percent of the area contains mixtures of perennial grasses

and forbs. Closed canopy sagebrush and conifers dominate the remaining area.

Rangeland wildlife habitat. Rangelands have the necessary structure and composition, ecological processes, and ecosystem function to meet most needs of Federal and State listed and sensitive rangeland-dependent wildlife species. The distribution of different amounts and ages of

shrubs, grassland, and woodland are approaching desired levels in a mosaic pattern.

Rehabilitation or restoration of native shrub communities are accomplished where site potential

permits to enhance wildlife habitat. Natural areas and areas of high species endemism or biodiversity are common and contribute to species viability, but gains in species viability are moderate.

Vegetation is appropriate for the site with multiple age classes of shrubs and grass being common. These habitats are becoming less fragmented and more connected due to increasing abundance of native vegetation. Areas are large and connected with other areas of similar vegetation

to maintain species distribution and densities that are closely associated with rangeland habitats.

Human activities are at a level that allows species to maintain expected distribution, but some

species densities may be low due to human activities. In many areas roads are closed or located

to reduce habitat fragmentation and reduce human disturbance; road densities are low in many

areas. Blocks of similar habitats are large and connect with areas of similar vegetation. In many

areas roads are closed, (seasonally or permanently) or located to achieve the desired wildlife

habitat conditions.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC

Social and economic systems have adjusted (in some locations grown) to the changed amounts

and product mix of commodity and noncommodity outputs. Enhanced forest, range, riparian and

aquatic ecosystems enable individuals and firms to obtain social and economic benefits from sustained levels of management projects and restoration actions.

Local public needs and desires are reconciled with the Federal agencies' ecosystem restoration

needs and opportunities.

Payments to local units of governments continue within an acceptable range based on local conditions and need for restoration.